TNAG-2323-FCO40-3367-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-Vietnamese-boat-people-1991 — Page 123

شده عاليه

الخ

$

CCPR/C/SR.857 page 8

32.

He had read a report about Hong Kong in which it was stated that the Immigration Ordinance required every citizen to carry an identity card which must be produced on demand by an authorized person, usually a police officer, that people were discriminately stopped in the street and asked to show their identity cards, and that police officers could use their radios to obtain personal computerized information on them. If that information was correct, such practices, together with the provisions of the Loitering Law, gave the police powerful means for arrest. He asked what kind of personal data were stored in police computers in Hong Kong.

33. Mr. LALLAH said that a general problem on which he would welcome some information was one that arose when institutions were established with powers exceeding the normal powers and when special police forces were created. He had in mind particularly the kind of situation that had arisen in his own country when a Commission of Inquiry had been set up and there had been a number of breaches of privacy, including inquiries into bank accounts. Whereas the information given to a magistrate was confined to grounds of reasonable suspicion, the powers of investigating officers were less restricted when it came to eventual prosecution before a court of law, and such powers might in certain cases be abused. He understood that a special unit existed in Hong Kong, and he asked whether there had been any complaints about the abuse of its powers.

34.

Mr. FEARN (United Kingdom) said that the Law Reform Commission in Hong Kong had decided to look into the question of privacy and personal data storage. He was unable to respond immediately to Mr. Mommersteeg's question but his delegation would reply later in writing.

35. Mr. MARTIN (United Kingdom) said that the law under the Immigration Ordinance in Hong Kong requiring citizens to carry their identity documents with them was simply designed to control illegal immigration. In addition to the influx of Vietnamese refugees to which he had referred earlier, there was also a substantial flow of illegal immigrants across the land border, which had caused considerable difficulties. He had some difficulty with the suggestion that people had been discriminately stopped in the street.

It was easier to make suggestions of that kind than to refute them, but the police were required by their General Orders to exercise their discretion when enforcing the law in question. There was a mechanism for the handling of complaints with respect to police conduct, and there had been some complaints that persons had been dealt with discriminately, but he was unable to give exact figures of the number of complaints or the number substantiated. Such figures could be made available later in writing.

36.

A complaints mechanism existed to deal with any complaints of abuse, but he was unaware of any such complaint. If one was to be made and substantiated, he would expect disciplinary proceedings to be taken. In that case, too, he would provide the Committee in writing with any information that might be available.

X.

Freedom of religion and expression; prohibition of propaganda for war and incitement to national, racial or religious hatred (articles 18, 19 and 20)

37. Mr. FEARN (United Kingdom) replying to the question in section X (a), said that there were no laws or regulations pertaining specifically to the

→